Scan barcode
nstew16's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
reflective
sad
medium-paced
4.5
Very accessible. At times it felt almost too casual for me, but I think that is part of the success of the book. It can reach a variety of people and acts as an open ended conversation between reader/author.
Content Warnings
Minor: Addiction, Adult/minor relationship, Alcoholism, Domestic abuse, Infidelity, Physical abuse, Rape, Self harm, Sexual assault, Suicide, and Abortion
aburns2's review against another edition
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Addiction, Adult/minor relationship, Alcoholism, Child abuse, Domestic abuse, Drug abuse, Drug use, Emotional abuse, Mental illness, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Physical abuse, Rape, Sexism, Sexual assault, Sexual violence, Suicide, Violence, Suicide attempt, Abandonment, Alcohol, and Sexual harassment
randeerebecca's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
1.0
This book basically feels like the author is being an apologist for “monstrous” behavior without coming right out and saying it because she’s a self-proclaimed feminist. I see her feminism, but I think it’s very simplistic and minimally intersectional. She starts the book off by arguing that use of the word “monster” for men who are abusers (i.e. Harvey Weinstein, Roman Polanski, Bill Cosby, etc.) is so that as individuals, we don’t need to acknowledge our own potential for those kinds of behaviors. Which is an interesting perspective, but also a flimsy excuse. At times, it seemed like the author was arguing this point simply to make herself feel better about continuing to consume art when she felt guilty doing so because of the creator’s crimes and behaviors. She also goes on to blame the internet because now people have to know that their beloved cultural icons have done horrible things - it seems to me she’d rather live in ignorance? There’s a simple solution, of course. The author personally does not have to engage with social media, the very thing she blames.
There were a few bits that really felt yucky to me:
- criticizing queer kids’ use of tumblr for “unbodied connection” with fandoms. Tell me you’re not queer without telling me? This is so ignorant of how isolating it can be to exist as queer, especially in small communities, and how important it can be to connect with others like you over something meaningful. But it’s wild because she later talks about being a weird kid needing connection and she got that from David Bowie music and fans? So she clearly understands the need, but maybe not the context.
- Listed men who have been found to be abusive and pedophilic as examples of cultural “monsters,” and THEN followed that by listing women who had mental health problems and said “does self harm count?”
- On Picasso’s abusive behavior towards women: “Picasso is the victim of, the servant to, his own impulses.”
- Implied that the reason society went after Woody Allen and Roman Polanski for their pedophilia is because they are Jewish and our society is anti-Semitic… not because they assaulted children or anything…
- Sylvia Plath is included in this book on cultural “monsters” because her suicide was a “violent act” against patriarchy, supposedly. The reality is that she was clinically depressed in the midst of heartbreak. The author does state that Plath was not a monster, so why is she even included in this discussion?
- She conflates recovery from addiction to someone needing support for their “monstrous” behavior (i.e. pedophilia, abuse, violence)
The message at the end, summed up: we’re all monsters and all victims and what we do doesn’t make a difference anyway, so consume the media created by perpetrators 👎🏻
I will give her this: she made a point to say that memoir should be description and not prescription, meaning she doesn’t feel a person’s views espoused in their memoir(s) should automatically be taken as life advice by readers. Which is good, because I certainly won’t with hers.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Addiction, Alcoholism, Child abuse, Cursing, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Physical abuse, Racism, Rape, Self harm, Suicide, Antisemitism, and Abandonment
dantruman's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
Thoughtful, challenging, informative, reflective.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Alcoholism, Bullying, Child abuse, Domestic abuse, Emotional abuse, Misogyny, Racism, Sexual assault, Sexual violence, Suicide, Toxic relationship, Antisemitism, Gaslighting, Abandonment, and Sexual harassment
The author is not in favor of the above but they come up in relation to the artist’s she discusses.claraarianne's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
tense
medium-paced
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Addiction, Adult/minor relationship, Alcoholism, Drug abuse, Homophobia, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Physical abuse, Racism, Rape, Sexism, Sexual assault, Sexual violence, Violence, Antisemitism, and Sexual harassment
librarymouse's review against another edition
emotional
informative
medium-paced
2.75
I don't know that this was necessarily what I was expecting. It was thought provoking at some points. At others, I lost the plot. While critiquing gender essentialism in general and in its association with power dynamics and gender stereotypes, the author often relies on it in the language used around her critique of powerful men.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child abuse, Domestic abuse, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Rape, Sexism, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Sexual violence, Toxic relationship, Sexual harassment, and Injury/Injury detail
Moderate: Alcoholism
monalyisha's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
4.75
I absolutely loved this. Dederer set out to write an ambitious book & she achieved her goal. Not only that, but she came off as being the kind of “cool” that I’ll only ever aspire to be. Her musical references range from Joni Mitchell to PWR BTTM with all the (plumbed) levels of complexity that implies. Ironically & infuriatingly, the effect is that I now want to watch/read/listen to all of the media she questions the morality of consuming.
I want to (re)watch Annie Hall. Remembering how much I loved Rosemary’s Baby, I want to dive into Polanski’s catalog. Of course, these creators are men who have committed terrible deeds (e.g. anal rape of a 13-year-old). Do we just forget that?
Dederer says no. She also doesn’t tell her readers NOT to watch/read/listen. Like any good thinker, she gives us more questions than answers. This isn’t a guidebook. Dederer won’t solve your ethical dilemma. She will ask you to lay bare your own reasoning and emotions, your insecurities, your doubts, your loves, your biases. She’ll do it by modeling this behavior on the page. She doesn’t let herself squirm away; she questions whether she is, herself, a monster. She unflinchingly tells you why she sometimes worries she might be.
Ultimately, she’ll tell you not to discount beauty or community. She’ll advise you not to place an undue emphasis on individual consumption. She’ll focus on systemic evils. She’ll tell you that “the way you consume art doesn't make you a bad person, or a good one. You'll have to find some other way to accomplish that.” She’ll encourage you not to forget about these other ways.
I do have a single criticism, which comes in the form of two words: “The Stain.” This is a concept Dederer introduces early on in the book and it’s something that she returns to repeatedly: how an artist’s biography can “stain” their work (spreading backwards and forwards through time), like wine spilled on linen. Unfortunately, this metaphor spills out of her in the chapter about Michael Jackson.
She writes, “The image of the stain immediately took hold of my brain (an especially poignant image in the context of Michael Jackson and the bleached anti-stain of his skin).” YIKES. Following this logic, blackness becomes “the stain.” I don’t for one second believe that Dederer intended to equate the two. But I wish she’d introduced the metaphor in the chapter about Picasso, when talking about his paints. For me, this single line about “the stain” became a stain on my total & unabashed enjoyment of her book. But I’m trying to convince myself that it was more a quick & clumsy fumble with a cup of coffee than a shattering of a full glass of Cabernet. It might come out in the wash.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Alcoholism, Child abuse, Death, Domestic abuse, Drug abuse, Racism, Rape, Suicide, Transphobia, Antisemitism, Murder, and Abandonment
seeingplaid's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
3.5
Author puts a lot of her own experience in a book about famous artists who are monsters and has a few moments of pretentiousness I was not wild about. But this is an interesting meditation on how fans interact with media and art when the artist who makes those works has done something so outside our values it affects our relationship to the art. Feminism is an important lense the author uses.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Adult/minor relationship, Alcoholism, Drug use, Pedophilia, Rape, and Suicide
hedgielib's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
3.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Alcoholism, Child abuse, Emotional abuse, Homophobia, Mental illness, Pedophilia, Rape, Sexual assault, Sexual violence, Violence, Murder, Abandonment, and Alcohol
jayisreading's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
2.0
I wish this essay collection worked for me, given my interest in the topic. but I found it rather disappointing. I think the questions that Dederer wanted to address are crucial ones for all of us to contend with. Can you actually separate art from the artist? Is it ethical to consume media by problematic (or “stained,” as she describes it) people, some of whom are labeled geniuses? How should we be engaging with problematic media, if at all?
I will say that I think it’s a little unfair to expect concrete answers from her, considering that it’s a bit more complicated than giving a simple “yes” or “no” response. However, a reader only has so much patience for any amount of waffling; by the third or fourth chapter, I was tired of it. I think it’s fine if an author wants to take a moment to think about a particular topic on-page, but they need to give the reader a reason to stick around for it. In other words, what’s at stake? Why should we care? Unfortunately, there wasn’t much of a point to any of these essays that gave me any indication as to why what Dederer wrote mattered. She had numerous missed opportunities to do in-depth analyses with the issues she raised. Instead, she provided a lot of surface-level observations that gave the reader very little to work with, other than to quizzically wonder, “Why should I care about your feelings over your favorite artist being problematic?” Relatedly, I saw a few reviewers comment that this book reads more like a memoir, which I’m inclined to agree with, especially when one takes into account the handful of personal anecdotes that Dederer hardly connected (if at all) to the topic at hand. In addition, I felt that she often failed to give enough context when she called a number of individuals “monsters.” Sure, readers could do separate research on some of the mentioned figures in the book to learn more about their wrongdoings, but part of an essayist’s responsibility is to provide even some of that context and nuance.
Again, the questions posed in this book are important ones. However, I think Dederer could have afforded to spend more time with these essays to better establish the points she wants to make, as well as to reorganize her ideas so that they are more closely connected.
Note: Many thanks to the publisher for sending me a finished paperback copy.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Domestic abuse, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Rape, Sexism, and Antisemitism
Moderate: Alcoholism
Minor: Death, Suicide, and Transphobia